### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A

,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e ,

v e r s u s

M I R I A M C A S T I L L O

- C O R P U S

,

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

A p p e a l f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t
f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f T e x a s U S D C N o

. 7 : 0 8

- C R

- 1 6 8 0

B e f o r e S M I T H

, D e M O S S

, a n d O W E N

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

J E R R Y E

. S M I T H

, C i r c u i t J u d g e : *

M i r i a m C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s a p p e a l s t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t s h e i s i n e l i g i b l e

f o r t h e s a f e t y

- v a l v e r e d u c t i o n u n d e r U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 C 1

. 2 ( 2 ) b e c a u s e s h e c o n s t r u c

U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D
May9, 201 1

Lyle W . Cayce
Clerk

Pursua nt to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5

, the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion s hould not *

be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/09/2011N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

t i v e l y p o s s e s s e d a f

i r e a r m

. W e f

i n d n o e r r o r a n d a f

f i r m

.

I

.

A c o n f i d e n t i a l i n f

o r m a n t c o n t a c t e d U n i t e d S t a t e s I m m i g r a t i o n a n d C u s

t o m s E n f

o r c e m e n t o f

f i c e r s a n d t o l d t h e m t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s ’ s r e s i d e n c e , a

m o d i f i e d t r a i l e r h o u s e , w a s b e i n g u s e d a s a “ s t a s h h o u s e ” f o r i l l e g a l d r u g s

. T h e

g o v e r n m e n t h a d s e i z e d s i x t y

- s e v e n p o u n d s o f m a r i h u a n a f r o m h e r r e s i d e n c e j u s t

a f e w m o n t h s b e f

o r e a n d k n e w t h a t h e r e x

- h u s b a n d a n d f o r m e r b o y f

r i e n d w e r e

i n v o l v e d i n d r u g t r a f

f i c k i n g a n d m o n e y l a u n d e r i n g

. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e b o d y o f C a s

t i l l o

- C o r p u s ’ s c l o s e m a l e f r i e n d w a s f

o u n d r i d d l e d w i t h b u l l e t s a n d s t a b w o u n d s

.

W h i l e o n s u r v e i l l a n c e o u t s i d e a w a r e h o u s e , a g e n t s s a w C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s

d r i v e p a s t t h e m a l o n g w i t h a m a l e w h o m C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s l a t e r i d e n t i f i e d a s h e r

c o u s i n “ C h a p a r r o

. ” T h e a g e n t s t h e n d r o v e p a s t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s ’ s h o u s e , w h e r e

t h e y o b s e r v e d h e r p o u r i n g l i q u i d b l e a c h o n t o t h e f r o n t p o r c h a n d d r i v e w a y

. T h e

a g e n t s r e t u r n e d t h e r e a f t e r w a r d

, b u t s h e h a d l e f t

. T h e a g e n t s t h e n d r o v e t o a

k n o w n r e l a t i v e ’ s r e s i d e n c e , w h e r e t h e y f o u n d h e r

.

C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s “ b r o k e d o w n ” a n d a d m i t t e d t h a t m a r i h u a n a w a s s t o r e d a t

h e r t r a i l e r h o u s e a n d t h a t s h e w a s p r e s e n t w h e n i t w a s u n l o a d e d

. S h e a l s o t o l d

o f f i c e r s t h a t t h e r e w a s a f i r e a r m i n h e r l i v i n g r o o m a n d t h a t i t w a s l o a d e d

. S h e

c l a i m e d t h a t t h e w e a p o n b e l o n g e d t o C h a p a r r o , h o w e v e r

.

O f f i c e r s o b t a i n e d a n d e x e c u t e d a s e a r c h w a r r a n t o n t h e h o u s e , w h e r e t h e y

f o u n d a l o a d e d

. 3 8 0 f

i r e a r m o n a c h a i r i n p l a i n v i e w b y a t a b l e i n t h e l i v i n g r o o m

.

T h e l i v i n g r o o m w a s l o c a t e d b e t w e e n t w o b e d r o o m s i n w h i c h o f f i c e r s f o u n d a

c o m b i n e d 1 4 9 b r i c k s o f m a r i h u a n a w e i g h i n g a b o u t 3

, 2 7 8 p o u n d s

.

C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s w a s c h a r g e d w i t h a i d i n g a n d a b e t t i n g t h e p o s s e s s i o n w i t h

i n t e n t t o d i s t r i b u t e o f m o r e t h a n 1 0 0 0 k i l o g r a m s o f m a r i h u a n a i n v i o l a t i o n o f 1 8

U

. S

. C

. § 2 a n d 2 1 U

. S

. C

. § § 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) a n d ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A )

. S h e p l e a d e d g u i l t y

. I n e x

c h a n g e , t h e g o v e r n m e n t a g r e e d t o r e c o m m e n d a t w o

- l e v e l r e d u c t i o n f o r a c c e p

2 Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/09/2011N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

t a n c e o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y u n d e r U

. S

. S

. G

. § 3 E 1

. 1 ( a )

.

I I

.

T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f

o u n d t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s m e r i t e d a s e n t e n c e o f 7 0

- 8 7

m o n t h s u n d e r t h e s e n t e n c i n g g u i d e l i n e s , b u t i t s e n t e n c e d h e r t o t h e m a n d a t o r y

m i n i m u m o f

1 2 0 m o n t h s

. C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s s o u g h t a s e n t e n c e b e l o w t h e m a n d a

t o r y m i n i m u m p u r s u a n t t o 1 8 U

. S

. C

. § 3 5 5 3 ( f ) a n d U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 C 1

. 2 ’ s s a f e t y

v a l v e p r o v i s i o n , b u t t h e g o v e r n m e n t a r g u e d t h a t s h e w a s i n e l i g i b l e f o r t h e r e

d u c t i o n b e c a u s e s h e p o s s e s s e d t h e f i r e a r m f

o u n d i n h e r h o u s e

. C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s

a r g u e d t h a t t h e f

i r e a r m b e l o n g e d t o C h a p a r r o , n o t h e r , t h a t C h a p a r r o l e f t i t i n

s i d e h e r h o u s e b e f

o r e t h e t w o o f t h e m d e p a r t e d

, a n d t h a t s h e n e v e r r e

- e n t e r e d

t h e h o u s e o r o t h e r w i s e h a d a c c e s s t o t h e w e a p o n

.

T h e c o u r t f

o u n d t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s c o n s t r u c t i v e l y p o s s e s s e d t h e f i r e a r m

i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h h e r o f f e n s e

. I t n o t e d t h a t t h e f i r e a r m w a s i n t h e “ h e a r t ” o f

h e r h o u s e

. S h e k n e w “ m a s s i v e q u a n t i t i e s ” o f m a r i h u a n a w e r e b e i n g s t o r e d

t h e r e

. S h e w a s t h e “ s t a s h h o u s e o p e r a t o r

. ” S h e w a s o b s e r v e d p o u r i n g b l e a c h

o u t s i d e t h e h o u s e b e f o r e s h e w a s a p p r e h e n d e d

. A n d s h e t o l d t h e o f f i c e r s a b o u t

t h e f i r e a r m a n d w a s k n o w i n g l y p r e s e n t i n t h e h o u s e w h e n t h e g u n a n d m a r i h u a

n a w e r e t h e r e

. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e c o u r t h e l d t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s w a s i n e l i g i b l e

f o r t h e § 5 C 1

. 2 s a f e t y

- v a l v e r e d u c t i o n

.

I I I

.

W e r e v i e w a l e g a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f § 5 C 1

. 2 d e n o v o a n d a s e n t e n c i n g 1

c o u r t ’ s a p p l i c a t i o n o f § 5 C 1

. 2 t o t h e f a c t s o f t h e c a s e f o r c l e a r e r r o r

. F l a n a g a n ,

8 0 F

. 3 d a t 1 4 5 ( c i t i n g R o d r i g u e z , 6 0 F

. 3 d a t 1 9 5 n

. 1 )

. F o r a f a c t u a l f i n d i n g n o t

Uni ted States v. Fla naga n , 80 F.3d 143, 145 (5t h Cir. 2006) ; see Uni ted States v. Rod- 1

ri guez , 60 F.3d 193, 195 n.1 (5t h Cir. 1995) (“ We revie w the legal inte rp ret atio n of the Sentenc ing G uide lines d e n ovo. ”)

.

3 Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/09/2011N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

t o b e c l e a r e r r o r , i t n e e d o n l y b e “ p l a u s i b l e i n l i g h t o f t h e r e c o r d a s a w h o l e

. ”

U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. R o d r i g u e z , 6 3 0 F

. 3 d 3 7 7

, 3 8 0 ( 5 t h C i r

. 2 0 1 1 )

.

T i t l e 1 8 U

. S

. C

. § 3 5 5 3 ( f ) a n d U

. S

. S

. G

. § 5 C 1

. 2 p r o v i d e t h a t t h e m a n d a t o r y

m i n i m u m s e n t e n c e s h a l l n o t a p p l y i f t h e d e f e n d a n t s a t i s f i e s c e r t a i n r e q u i r e

m e n t s , o n e o f w h i c h i s t h a t h e “ d i d n o t

. . . p o s s e s s a f i r e a r m

. . . i n c o n n e c t i o n

w i t h t h e o f

f e n s e

. ” C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s a r g u e s t h a t s h e d i d n o t c o n s t r u c t i v e l y p o s s e s s

t h e f i r e a r m f

o u n d i n h e r h o u s e b e c a u s e i t b e l o n g e d t o C h a p a r r o a n d s h e h a d n o

“ r e a l i s t i c a c c e s s ” t o i t

. T h e d e f e n d a n t b e a r s t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g b y a p r e p o n

d e r a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t s h e d i d n o t p o s s e s s t h e f i r e a r m f

o r § 5 C 1

. 2 p u r p o s

e s

. U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. V a s q u e z , 1 6 1 F

. 3 d 9 0 9

, 9 1 2 ( 5 t h C i r

. 1 9 9 8 )

.

T h e r e i s a t e n s i o n i n o u r c a s e l a w w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e l e g a l

s t a n d a r d t o a p p l y t o d e t e r m i n e c o n s t r u c t i v e p o s s e s s i o n u n d e r § 5 C 1

. 2

. S o m e o f

o u r d e c i s i o n s i m p l y t h a t

, a s w i t h § 2 D 1

. 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) o f t h e s e n t e n c i n g g u i d e l i n e s , a d e

f e n d a n t c o n s t r u c t i v e l y p o s s e s s e s a f i r e a r m u n d e r § 5 C 1

. 2 i f t h e r e i s a “ t e m p o r a l

a n d s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n

. . . b e t w e e n t h e w e a p o n , t h e d r u g t r a f f i c k i n g a c t i v i t y , a n d

t h e d e f e n d a n t ” a n d i t i s n o t “ c l e a r l y i m p r o b a b l e t h a t t h e f i r e a r m [ ] [ w a s ] c o n n e c t

e d t o h i s o f

f e n s e

. ” W e h a v e a l s o f o u n d c o n s t r u c t i v e p o s s e s s i o n u n d e r § 5 C 1

. 2 ( 2 ) 2

See Uni ted States v. Or donez

, 286 F. App ’x 224, 233- 34 (5t h Cir

. 2008) ( per cur iam ) 2 (af fir mi ng the dis tri ct cour t’s ref usa l to app ly the § 5C1.2 saf ety valve, beca use it “d id not err in find ing that [t he def enda nt] pos se ss ed a gun f o r t h e pur pos es of § 2D 1.1( b)( 1)” ); Uni ted
States v. Ma r ti n e z , 111 F. App ’x 341, 342 (5t h Cir. 2004) (p er cur iam ) (s ame ); Uni ted States

v. Sanc hez -V

as quez , 70 F. App ’x 187, 188- 89 (5t h Cir. 2003) (p er cur iam ) (int erp ret ing § 2D 1.1- (b) (1) and § 5C1.2 (2) analogo usl y to hold that the def enda nt cons tru cti vely pos se ss ed a fir earm ); Va sque z , 161 F.3d at 911- 13 (p er cur iam ) (ho ldi ng that

, “d es pit e a n y d iff ere nce in se

man tic s betw een § 2D 1.1( b)( 1) and § 5C1.2 (2) ,” § 5C1.2 (2) ’s “ i n c o nnect ion wi th the off ens e”

requ irem ent sho uld be inte rp ret ed “anal ogous ly” to § 2D 1.1( b)( 1)’ s “p os se ss ion” language, but leaving ope n t he pos sib ilit y t hat § 5 C1.2 and § 2D1 .1 s hould not be inter pr ete d the s ame f or all pur pos es , “inc ludi ng wh ethe r anot her’ s act ions can be att ribut ed to the def enda nt” ); Uni ted
States v . My ers , 150 F.3d 459, 465 (5t h Cir . 1998) (“The d ist ric t cour t . . . [ fou nd] that Mye rs kn ew about

, and poss es se d, the rifle in the cour se of the cons pir acy. We ther efo re aff irm the

tw o-l evel fir earm enhanc em ent [und er § 2D 1.1( b)( 1)] and nec ess ar il y aff irm the dis tri ct cour t’s
find ing that Myer s wa s not eligibl e for the ‘s afe ty valve’ pr ovis ion of U. S. S. G. § 5C1.2 (2) .” (em

phas is add ed) ); Uni ted States v. Fluc as , 99 F.3d 177, 178- 79 (5t h Cir. 1996) (p er cur iam ) (“ Flu- (c onti nued

.. .)

4 Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/09/2011N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

b y r e l y i n g o n l a n g u a g e f r o m o u r c a s e s i n v o l v i n g s t a n d a l o n e p o s s e s s i o n o f f e n s e s ,

v i z

. w h e t h e r t h e d e f

e n d a n t h a s “ o w n e r s h i p , d o m i n i o n o r c o n t r o l o v e r t h e [ f i r e

a r m ]

. . . o r d o m i n i o n o r c o n t r o l o v e r t h e p r e m i s e s i n w h i c h t h e [ f i r e a r m ] i s c o n

c e a l e d

. ” W e h a v e n e v e r d e t e r m i n e d w h e t h e r o u r h o l d i n g s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e

3

l e g a l s t a n d a r d f

o r j o i n t c o n s t r u c t i v e p o s s e s s i o n o f a w e a p o n a p p l i c a b l e t o s t a n d

a l o n e p o s s e s s i o n o f

f e n s e s a l s o a p p l y t o § 5 C 1

. 2 ( 2 )

. B e c a u s e n e i t h e r t h e d i s t r i c t 4

c o u r t n o r t h e p a r t i e s a d d r e s s e d t h a t s t r a i n i n t h e j u r i s p r u d e n c e , h o w e v e r , a n d

b e c a u s e C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s p o s s e s s e d a f i r e a r m r e g a r d l e s s o f w h i c h s t a n d a r d w e a p

p l y , w e d e c l i n e t o r e s o l v e t h e i s s u e , e v e n i f

, a s a p a n e l

, w e h a d t h e a u t h o r i t y t o

d o s o

. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s f i n d i n g t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s p o s s e s s e d a f i r e a r m i n

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h h e r o f f e n s e i s p l a u s i b l e a n d t h e r e f o r e n o t c l e a r e r r o r

.

C o n s t r u c t i v e p o s s e s s i o n “ n e e d n o t b e e x c l u s i v e [ ; ] i t m a y b e j o i n t w i t h o t h

e r s

. ” U n i t e d S t a t e s v

. F a m b r o , 5 2 6 F

. 3 d 8 3 6

, 8 3 9 ( 5 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 8 )

. T h e g u n w a s

f o u n d i n p l a i n v i e w i n t h e l i v i n g r o o m o f C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s ’ s h o u s e , o u t s i d e o f

w h i c h o f

f i c e r s s a w h e r p o u r i n g b l e a c h o n t o h e r p o r c h a n d d r i v e w a y w h e n i t

a p p e a r s n o o n e e l s e w a s t h e r e

. B a s e d o n h e r t e s t i m o n y t o o f f i c e r s a f t e r s h e

“ b r o k e d o w n , ” C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s n o t o n l y k n e w t h a t t h e f i r e a r m w a s i n t h e h o u s e

(

.. .c onti nued ) 2

cas argues that it wa s err or to adj u s t his se nten ce by tw o levels for pos se ss ion of a fir earm [p urs uant to § 2D 1.1( b)( 1)]

. The find ing that Flucas pos se ss ed a we apo n is als o signi fic ant becaus e i t dis qualif

ied Fluc as fr om be ing e ligible f or the ‘s afe ty valve’ pr ovis ion

. . . .” ).

See Uni ted States v. Ma tias

, 465 F.3d 169, 173 (5t h Cir. 2006) (quo ting Uni ted States 3

v. Fi el ds

, 72 F. 3d 1200, 121 2 ( 5th Cir. 199 6))

.

For exam ple

, we have held that

, unde r 18 U. S. C. § 922( g)( 1), wh en “tw o or mo re per

4

so ns joint ly occ upy the plac e wh ere a fir earm is fou nd, me re cont rol or dom inion of that plac e is, by its elf

, ins uff

icie nt to es tabl ish cons tru cti ve pos se ss ion. ” Fie lds

, 72 F.3d at 1212. If ther e is joint oc cup ancy, t he pr os ecut ion mus t sho w “ac ces s to and kn ow led ge” of the we apo n. Id.

But cf

. Sanc hez -V

as quez , 70 F. App ’x at 188- 89 (ho ldi ng that

, unde r U. S

. S. G. § 2D 1.1( b)( 1),
“‘n eit her the se nten cing guide lines nor the cas e law requ ires that the Go vernm ent pr ove a defen dant had kno wl edge of a we apo n’s exist ence ’” and conclu ding that becaus e the de fen dant

pos se ss ed a we apo n unde r § 2D 1.1( b)( 1), he pos se ss ed a we apo n unde r § 5C1.2 (2) (quo ting Fluca s , 99 F. 3d at 179) ).

5 Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 5 Date Filed: 05/09/2011N o

. 1 0

- 4 0 3 0 0

b u t k n e w i t w a s l o a d e d

. H e r a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e g u n b e l o n g e d t o C h a p a r r o a n d

t h a t s h e n e v e r h a d a c c e s s t o i t i s n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n t h a t : a n a r g u m e n t ; t h e o n l y

e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t i t i s h e r s e l f

- s e r v i n g t e s t i m o n y

. T h e r e f o r e , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

d i d n o t c l e a r l y e r r i n f i n d i n g t h a t C a s t i l l o

- C o r p u s f a i l e d t o p r o v e b y a p r e p o n d e r

a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t s h e d i d n o t p o s s e s s t h e w e a p o n

. T h e j u d g m e n t o f c o n

v i c t i o n i s A F F I R M E D

.

6 Case: 10-40300 Document: 00511470266 Page: 6 Date Filed: 05/09/2011